FBGRX vs. DCMSX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

FBGRX (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund) and DCMSX (DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio) are both mutual funds - FBGRX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Fidelity, while DCMSX is a Commodities fund managed by Dimensional. Over the past 10 years, FBGRX returned 20.56%/yr vs 7.74%/yr for DCMSX. Their 0.20 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FBGRX charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.31%/yr for DCMSX.

Performance

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) and DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio (DCMSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBGRX achieves a 10.15% return, which is significantly lower than DCMSX's 26.50% return. Over the past 10 years, FBGRX has outperformed DCMSX with an annualized return of 20.56%, while DCMSX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.74% annualized return.

FBGRX

• 1D: 3.14%
• 1M: -4.18%
• 6M: 10.25%
• YTD: 10.15%
• 1Y: 24.18%
• 3Y*: 25.20%
• 5Y*: 13.50%
• 10Y*: 20.56%
• ALL TIME*: 13.47%

DCMSX

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 6.99%
• 6M: 12.68%
• YTD: 26.50%
• 1Y: 39.23%
• 3Y*: 13.08%
• 5Y*: 10.75%
• 10Y*: 7.74%
• ALL TIME*: 1.37%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DCMSX DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	10.15%	19.91%	39.77%	55.61%	-38.45%	22.64%	62.20%	33.43%	1.02%	36.01%
DCMSX DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio	26.50%	15.15%	5.90%	-9.14%	11.36%	33.54%	-1.78%	7.96%	-11.22%	2.73%

Correlation

The correlation between FBGRX and DCMSX is -0.05, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.12
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2010	0.20

The correlation between FBGRX and DCMSX shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FBGRX vs. DCMSX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FBGRX

FBGRX Risk / Return Rank: 40
FBGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
FBGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
FBGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FBGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FBGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 45

DCMSX

DCMSX Risk / Return Rank: 80
DCMSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
DCMSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
DCMSX Omega Ratio Rank: 81
DCMSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
DCMSX Martin Ratio Rank: 72

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) and DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio (DCMSX). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FBGRX	DCMSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	2.14	-1.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	2.79	-1.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.37	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	2.61	-0.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.19	8.68	-2.49

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBGRX Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the DCMSX Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBGRX and DCMSX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBGRX drawdown since its inception was -58.64%, roughly equal to the maximum DCMSX drawdown of -60.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBGRX and DCMSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBGRX	DCMSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.64%	-60.94%	+2.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.65%	-13.81%	+1.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.07%	-13.81%	-13.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.08%	-27.93%	-15.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.08%	-32.52%	-10.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.79%	-6.91%	-0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.49%	-31.55%	+19.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.54%	4.20%	-0.66%

Volatility

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) has a higher volatility of 6.56% compared to DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio (DCMSX) at 4.50%. This indicates that FBGRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DCMSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBGRX	DCMSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.56%	4.50%	+2.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.09%	13.81%	+2.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.05%	16.82%	+3.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.24%	16.29%	+8.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.83%	14.47%	+9.36%

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBGRX has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than DCMSX's 0.31% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBGRX vs. DCMSX - Dividend Comparison

FBGRX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, less than DCMSX's 8.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DCMSX DFA Commodity Strategy Portfolio	8.43%	10.75%	2.83%	2.52%	7.46%	49.44%	0.37%	1.51%	1.63%	3.09%	0.47%	0.15%
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	1.72%	1.90%	5.95%	0.93%	0.57%	8.73%	6.40%	3.70%	6.32%	4.23%	4.05%	5.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBGRX and DCMSX in my portfolio?

FBGRX and DCMSX have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBGRX or DCMSX?

FBGRX has higher volatility (6.56%) compared to DCMSX (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBGRX dropped -58.64% vs DCMSX's -60.94%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DCMSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.09), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.